Re: calculation accuracy
- From: Thomas Koenig <Thomas.Koenig@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 20:33:56 +0200 (CEST)
Richard Maine <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes. It seems sort of pointless to declare pi_d as double precision and
also properly specify the literal as double precision, but then give
only 8 digits of it. It isn't as though the compiler is going to be able
to guess "oh, that's close to pi, and the variable name has pi in it, so
maybe I should use a more accurate value of pi instead of the one
specified).
Can we have a standardized way to specify pi? Please?
There would be a need to differentiate different kinds, of course.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: calculation accuracy
- From: Ben Hetland
- RE: calculation accuracy
- From: meek
- Re: calculation accuracy
- From: Beliavsky
- Re: calculation accuracy
- References:
- calculation accuracy
- From: Ben
- Re: calculation accuracy
- From: glen herrmannsfeldt
- Re: calculation accuracy
- From: Richard Maine
- calculation accuracy
- Prev by Date: BOZ literal constants, a puzzle for us Standard-loving types.
- Next by Date: Re: unable to view symbols in gdb
- Previous by thread: Re: calculation accuracy
- Next by thread: Re: calculation accuracy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|